Thread #218308807
HomeIndexCatalogAll ThreadsNew ThreadReply
H
+Showing all 15 replies.
>>
I don't know what's worse the reviews or the movies the reviews are for
>>
the more obscure the movie, the more likely you are to find decent well-written reviews

anything even mildly popular is going to have nothing but insanely unfunny pithy one-liners from soilennials and teen girls
>>
>>218308807
This site is truly awful, full of americans leftists, it's juste like Reddit
>>
I remember when the guy who stole Armond White National Review reviews and put them under the respective movies got censored over Intolerance (1916)
>>
>>218308884
only gaylennials use it. They're gonna be 80 and still seem more childish then the 5 year olds
>>
>>218309013
There are definitely some younger people using it, but it's mostly women and girls and just like "booktok" they are all mentally ill fujoshis and furry porn enthusiasts.
>>
>>218309186
film twitter was a mistake
>>
>>218309186
>furry porn enthusiasts
Based
>>
File: wypipo.jpg (986.6 KB)
986.6 KB
986.6 KB JPG
Why are chuds so media illiterate?
>>
Korea won Letterboxd, weebs seething.
>>
>>218308807
It's a website for women
>>
>>218308807
faggot and foid site
>>
I like commenting on and calling out people's dogshit reviews. It always gets them riled up.
>>
>>218310237
Where are the based and redpilled movie sites?
>>
>>218308807
Imagine using that when IMDB already does the exact same thing except has a user base 1500 times larger.

Reply to Thread #218308807


Supported: JPG, PNG, GIF, WebP, WebM, MP4, MP3 (max 4MB)